Firearms in Homes

Firearms in Homes

The founding fathers of the United States deemed the right to bear arms important enough to include it as the Second Amendment of the Constitution in the Bill of Rights, stating, “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed” (National Archives and Records Administration). Alabama’s Constitution allows for its citizens to have the right to bear arms for personal defense or that of the State. A license is not required to bear a firearm in one’s own residence or fixed place of business (NRA-Institute for Legislative Action, 2010). Whether to keep firearms in the home is a controversial topic that is the source of many heated debates and research studies. This paper will present the arguments from both sides of the debate, along with the research and/or literature employed which justifies each position.

The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence website (Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, 2011) cites many studies and statistics regarding deaths which are attributed to firearms present in the home, including homicides, suicides, and unintentional shootings. Jim Brady was Ronald Reagan’s press secretary who was shot by John Hinckley, Jr. on March 30, 1981 during a Presidential assignation attempt. This shooting, which left Jim Brady partially and permanently paralyzed, caused his wife, Sarah to become active in the gun control movement. The Brady Act, which requires background checks on any person attempting to purchase a firearm, was first introduced in the United States Congress on February 4, 1987, with Bill Clinton signing it into law on November 30, 1993. One of the large contributors of statistical information which is utilized by the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence is Dr. Arthur Kellerman. Kellerman’s 1998 article, “Injuries and Deaths Due to Firearms in the Home” (Kellerman, 1998), is based on his study comparing the number of times a firearm in the home was used to injure or kill in self-defense versus the times the weapon’s presence in the home resulted in suicide attempt, criminal assault, unintentional injury, or homicide. Kellerman conducted his study (twelve months in Memphis, TN; eighteen months in Seattle, WA and Galveston, TX), reviewing police, medical examiner, emergency medical service, emergency department, and hospital records to examine the reason for the shootings, both fatal and nonfatal. Kellerman determined from the records reviewed that the unjustifiable shootings (unintentional shootings, criminal assaults, homicides, and attempted or completed suicides) far outweighed the justifiable (self-defense) ones in the following ratios: unintentional shootings 4:1; criminal assaults and homicides 7:1; attempted or completed suicides 11:1. This made his overall conclusion that firearms in the home were twenty-two times more likely to be used for unjustifiable reasons than for self-defense.

In another article, “Risks and Benefits of a Gun in the Home”, David Hemenway, PhD, compiles other articles of scientific literature regarding the risks and benefits of firearms in the home (Hemenway, 2011). Hemenway first identifies the major risks of gun ownership as accidents, suicides, assaults and homicides, and intimidation. Using data from the National Violent Death Reporting System, the author cites many statistics comparing United States accidental shootings with other countries, reviewing both fatal and nonfatal injuries, as well as self-inflicted versus other inflicted accidental shootings. Hemenway states that firearms in the home are one of the most significant preventable accidental injury hazards, with the United States being higher than other countries, and self-inflicted shootings outweighing those inflicted by others. He also states that suicide, which is quite often an impulsive act due to a temporary circumstance, is more likely to be lethal when a gun is used than all other methods combined. Hemenway found in his research that suicide rates were higher for homes with firearms, particularly if the firearms were unlocked and loaded; this higher risk factor applied to all household members, not just the gun owner. When firearm ownership rates have been lower, so has the suicide rate, although the rate of those with suicidal ideation did not change. From the information gathered, Hemenway concludes that it is the availability of a very lethal method of suicide that makes a significant difference in the suicide rates. Similarly, the presence of a firearm caused homicides occur at a higher rate, possibly due to an impulsive act, which can be caused by a domestic quarrel and heightened by the use of alcohol. Intimidation was another risk the author details regarding firearms in the home, stating that guns are often used as part of intimate partner violence for the purpose of scaring, threatening, or harming women who, in turn, will most likely not use a gun in self-defense. The possible benefits that Hemenway explores in this article are crime deterrence and thwarting of an already-in-progress crime. He explains that most people keep firearms in the home for protection, particularly against stranger violence however, most burglaries do not occur when someone is home and, if violence does occur, it is not likely to be a stranger who is the culprit, but rather it is more likely to be an acquaintance or family member. In terms of firearm presence deterring crime, Hemenway cites studies that reveal quite the contrary; homes with guns are actually burglarized at a higher rate, and more likely to be burglarized when someone is home. The author explains that this may be due to burglars being attracted to the value of the stolen firearms. As for thwarting crimes, Hemenway cites that the National Research Council finds the available data is unreliable, mostly because of the ambiguity of the term “self-defense”. Overall, the National Crime Victimization Survey’s data found that calling the police was better at thwarting crime than threatening with a gun. The author’s summation is that there are no credible studies which suggest the benefits outweigh the risks of having firearms in the home.

One of the most-publicized groups who lobby for gun owners to continue having “the right to bear arms” is the National Rifle Association, better known simply as the NRA. The NRA website has an article which directly refutes the above-cited Kellerman study (National Rifle Association of America, 2001). The author of the article says that Kellerman’s work is propaganda that had a political agenda from the beginning. In the article, the NRA asserts that Kellerman’s study was done on a small scale in areas non-representative of the country. The author further critiques Kellerman’s work by pointing out the defensive use of guns was understated, as the only measure of crime deterrence in his study was criminals being injured or killed; the NRA argues that lives saved is the true measure of the protective benefits of firearms. The NRA’s final argument in this post regarding Kellerman’s research is that the research data and therefore, his statistical percentages, are derived from sloppy work, since with a very small percentage of the homicides/assaults involved guns being kept in the victim’s homes.

Finally, in the web article titled,” In Defense of Self Defense”, author Jeff Worley discusses the research behind the political decisions regarding Americans’ right to bear arms (Worley, 2009). The case of D.C v. Heller used much of the research by Florida State University criminology professor Gary Kleck, although he was not directly involved in the case. The case, initiated by a security guard named Dick Heller, resulted in the Supreme Court overturning the District of Columbia’s handgun ban in a 5-4 decision. Kleck applauded the law being overturned, since residents of the District of Columbia are now able to protect themselves; also, contrary to what was expected, during the time of the handgun ban, homicide rates in the District of Columbia rose significantly, with guns being used in most of the shootings. Kleck’s research over the years has found that victims of criminal attacks who are armed with guns are less likely to sustain serious injuries than if they utilize any other strategy, including non-resistance. Worley adds that Kleck is not your typical pro gun ownership advocate: he is Democrat, is a member of the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union), Amnesty International USA, and is not a member of the NRA—nor has he ever received any research funding from them or any organization of the sort. His findings on this issue are totally research-based. Kleck has found through his research that victims use guns more often for self-protection than do offenders for the purpose of committing a crime; also criminals are less likely to attack someone they believe to be carrying a gun, or breaking into a residence when someone might be home (for fear of being shot). Carrying a gun can enable the law-abiding citizen to protect his body and property, most times without ever shooting the weapon, harming the offender, or causing injury to himself. Laws aimed at gun control are only applicable to handguns, not long guns, which are more accurate and lethal than handguns. The advantage of carrying a handgun is that it is easily concealed however, a long gun, once purchased, can be sawed off or otherwise modified to make it just as concealable. Kleck’s opinion is that we should not have stringent policies regarding handguns when the unrestricted substitute is more deadly. He states that valid, unbiased research should be what determines gun control policies. Kleck’s concern is that we avoid ineffective, potentially deadly gun laws and continue to enable the average law-abiding citizen to protect his person, family, and property.






Works Cited
Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. (2011). Guns in the Home. Retrieved 11 23, 2011, from Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence: http://www.bradycampaign.org/facts/gunviolence/gunsinthehome
Hemenway, D. (2011). Risks and Benefits of a Gun in the Home. American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine , 10.
Kellerman, A. L. (1998). Inuries and Deaths Due to Firearms in the Home. Journal of Trauma, Injury, Infection, and Critical Care , 263-267.
National Archives and Records Administration. (n.d.). Bill of Rights. Retrieved 11 23, 2011, from The Charters of Freedom: http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html
National Rifle Association of America. (2001, 12 11). 22 Times Less Safe? Retrieved 11 23, 2011, from NRA-ILA: www.nraila.org/Issues/FactSheets/Read.aspx?ID=119
NRA-Institute for Legislative Action. (2010, 02). Firearms Laws for Alabama. Retrieved 11 23, 2011, from NRA-ILA: http://www.nraila.org/statelawpdfs/ALSL.pdf
Worley, J. (2009, Winter). In Defense of Self Defense. Retrieved 11 23, 2011, from Florida State University Research in Review: http://www.rinr.fsu.edu/issues/2009winter/cover01_a.asp